11 for ’11: Julie Robinson on spaceflight

During the holiday season I’ve invited 11 of the greater Houston area’s top scientific minds to share a few words on something — a trend, a discovery or an insight — in their field that excites them as they look ahead to the next few years. A new entry in the 11 for ’11 series will be published each morning.

Today’s insight comes from Julie Robinson, chief scientist for the International Space Station.

The International Space Station — the most capable laboratory ever in space — becomes fully available to scientists in 2011. Managed as a National Laboratory, the entire nation will have access for research.

Often critics of the space station, the editors of the journal Naturerecently recognized the importance of the laboratory, writing: “In a time of austerity, [researchers] have been handed the ultimate luxury: a new frontier for research that is limited only by their imagination.”

Early use of the space station for research shows compelling possibilities for what scientists will learn. Cellular and microbial biology is poised to make substantial advances. Already, new mechanisms of Salmonella bacteria virulence have been discovered. There are strong indicators that studies of cell differentiation and tissue formation in space could be transforming.

Seeing the station’s potential, the National Institutes of Health have already selected experiments to make use of the laboratory for research that cannot be done on Earth. These studies look at broad areas of human health, including bone remodeling, immune function, and barrier functions of intestinal lining.

Risking scientific whiplash to shift focus to fundamental physics, 2011 will also see the launch of the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer. This state-of-the-art instrument, developed by hundreds of scientists around the globe, will study the formation of the universe and seek to understand dark matter itself.

From the cosmos to genes in bacteria, the space station is the laboratory to watch for discoveries that could never occur at an Earth-bound lab as the era of space station utilization begins.

Speaking as one of Dr. Robinson’s colleagues, I can say there is nothing “PC” about her title.

As the ISS Program Scientist, Dr. Robinson is ultimately responsible for the strategic planning of all scientific research on the Space Station, including coordinating the research allocations with our international partners.

With over 50 publications to her name and a research background in biological and physical sciences, she is an honest-to-goodness scientist, as well.

I’m sure Julie is well qualified and a smart lady….I’m glad she kept her comments near earth and didn’t go off on a “conquor space” tangent……the only frontiers left we can conquor are our oceans and disease

International Space Station? Pfah! Clinton gave away Space Station FREEDOM, subcontracted other countries to build parts, and we paid some of them to do it. That monstrosity in the skies is a kick in the teeth to people who believed in American leadership in space, not this “partnership” kumbaya stuff.

So, what’s new in space flight? NOTHING. We’ll be hitching rides from the Russkies. The shuttle is being retired and Obama canceled Orion. What do we have to show as a “space program?” Self-indulgent billionaires with rocket toys giving rides to the hundred klick mark. Pfah.

In the Sunday Chronicle story, A Glimpse Into the Future of Science, Julie Robinson, Chief Scientist for the International Space Station, quotes the Journal Nature as recognizing the importance of the Space Station and, “A new frontier for research that is limited only by their imagination. What Nature actually states in the December 1, 2010 article (Nature, 468, 599-600) is, “Handed US $100 billion to spend on research, few scientists would invest in a cramped laboratory in constant need of maintenance with few facilities and one hell of a commute. So it is worth stating the obvious up front: the International Space Station (ISS) is an expensive, wasteful and probably unnecessary way to conduct science. The value of research carried out on the station will almost certainly never justify its ludicrous price tag. The money could surely have been put to better use on Earth”. Perhaps Ms. Robinson was misquoted